By Larry JohnsoncloseAuthor: Larry JohnsonName: Larry Johnson Email: larry_johnson@earthlink.net Site:http://NoQuarterUSA.net About: Larry C. Johnson is CEO and co-founder of BERG Associates, LLC, an international business-consulting firm with expertise combating terrorism and investigating money laundering. Mr. Johnson works with US military commands in scripting terrorism exercises, briefs on terrorist trends, and conducts undercover investigations on counterfeiting, smuggling and money laundering.
Mr. Johnson, who worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management.
Mr. Johnson has analyzed terrorist incidents for a variety of media including the Jim Lehrer News Hour, National Public Radio, ABC's Nightline, NBC's Today Show, the New York Times, CNN, Fox News, and the BBC. Mr. Johnson has authored several articles for publications, including Security Management Magazine, the New York Times, and The Los Angeles Times. He has lectured on terrorism and aviation security around the world, including the Center for Research and Strategic Studies at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris, France. He represented the U.S. Government at the July 1996 OSCE Terrorism Conference in Vienna, Austria.
From 1989 until October 1993, Larry Johnson served as a Deputy Director in the U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism. He managed crisis response operations for terrorist incidents throughout the world and he helped organize and direct the US Government’s debriefing of US citizens held in Kuwait and Iraq, which provided vital intelligence on Iraqi operations following the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. Mr. Johnson also participated in the investigation of the terrorist bombing of Pan Am 103. Under Mr. Johnson’s leadership the U.S. airlines and pilots agreed to match the US Government’s two million-dollar reward.
From 1985 through September 1989 Mr. Johnson worked for the Central Intelligence Agency. During his distinguished career, he received training in paramilitary operations, worked in the Directorate of Operations, served in the CIA’s Operation’s Center, and established himself as a prolific analyst in the Directorate of Intelligence. In his final year with the CIA he received two Exceptional Performance Awards.
Mr. Johnson is a member of the American Society for Industrial Security. He taught at The American University’s School of International Service (1979-1983) while working on a Ph.D. in political science. He has a M.S. degree in Community Development from the University of Missouri (1978), where he also received his B.S. degree in Sociology, graduating Cum Laude and Phi Beta Kappa in 1976.See Authors Posts (689) on April 25, 2008 at 1:23 PM in Barack Obama, Current Affairs, Terrorism, William Ayers
Reed Hundt, a major fund raiser for Barack Obama and frequent defender of same, offered this defense of THE ONE on Thursday over at TPM Cafe:
It ought to be beneath senator McCain to have his side label Obama as a terrible person because he has failed to shun a fellow who did wrong 40 years or is not a patriot because he neglected to wear a flag on lapel, or declined to disavow a Korean War vet and pastor because he spoke too harshly one Sunday.
Reed Hundt is not just some observer who happens to like Barack. He has a close relationship with Barack’s campaign and ensures the Obama talking points find their way to Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall’s blog. So this begs the question, does Senator Obama endorse Reed Hundt’s position? Or, more accurately, is Reed Hundt providing us the position of the Obama campaign? Or, is Barack Obama repentant for having a relationship with an unrepentant terrorist?
Do you follow the logic? A guy, in this case Bill Ayers, participated in a campaign of domestic terrorism. He used bombs to communicate his rage. But he did it over 40 years ago so who cares?I am sure glad folks like Simon Wiesenthal and Elie Wiesel did not take that view of the Nazis. They believed that the actions of people 65 years ago matter even today. Wiesenthal is dead, but Elie Wiesel is a living witness to remind us, Never Forget.
I am not saying that Bill Ayers is a monster on the scale of Klaus Barbie or Dr. Mengele. But he did monstrous things and participated in an organization guilty of murder. Of course, I think Ayers would deserve leniency if he simply admitted the error of his way. But that’s not the case. Check out the following:
And this is the audio-only version:
This is the problem. Ayers does not feel one shred of remorse. As he stated in a different interview, he regrets he did not do more. So when it comes to Barack Obama, we’re not questioning his judgment of having a close relationship with Bill Ayers because of what Ayers did forty years ago. What will bother most Americans is that Bill Ayers continues to espouse the views and attitudes that guided his actions forty years ago. That dog won’t hunt. Most Americans will not support a candidate for President does not understand that past actions by a terrorist matter today?
Some of us will not forget. It is a matter of justice.
The thing that comes to mind about Ayers, and Obama’s association with him, is that for every once crime or plot we know about with Ayers and the Underground, there are probably 5 more that we don’t.
You just don’t associate with bad people if you’re not a bad person yourself. Unrepenting radicals are hardly indicative of unity, hope, or change.
Brand Obama is a creation. And if they succeed in shoving him down our throats, and he somehow manages to beat McCain (never going to happen) then we’ll be watching a film in the future called “Obama’s Brain”, about David Axelrod. the King Maker. Just blows me away that people are suspending all rational thinking so that they cannot even acknowledge that the “inspiration” they’re feeling has been written by a middle-aged white guy that specializes in messages for AA candidates. And.. that much of what Obama preaches is rehashed from other candidates or clients of Axelrods.
Actions speak louder than words… and you ARE judged by the company you keep. How hard is that to grasp?
Ayers was a Grad Student getting his second masters as well as Doctrate in Eduaction at Columbia, the same time Obama tranferred in. It is almost certain that Obama had him as a “teacher” - known in academia lingo as a Graduate Assistant - for one or more of his undergrad classes.
Hopefully by Sunday, I can connect enough dots to show that Bernadine Dohrn, whom Mel tells us got Obama his internship at Sidly et al law firm, also knew Obama in New York - though she is smarter than Ayers and leaves fewer “footprints”.
So it’s not that Obama and Ayers just “sat on the same board” -as you suspected the relationship is much deeper than that.
These SOB’s truly are trying to “Re-Create ‘68″ in more ways than one.
Nellie, Interesting info connecting Ayers and Obama at Columbia. I really want to see a piece that fills in the real history of their relationship. Lots of stuff has been posted here. I hope someone is working on putting it all together. And soon.
The man who was Obam’s mentor in Hawaii and good friends with Ayers Sr.
must have been telling BO to look Ayers son up.
I believe Nellie is correct that the reason the his Columbia U days are dodgy is because he was hanging out on a regular basis with these terrorists while in NY.
The landlord in the early 1980s was Jay Weiss, a real estate mogul who was then the husband of the actress Kathleen Turner.
Ayers is undoubtedly a jackass, but serving on the same board as a jackass does not a jackass make. Try again. folks.
Obama will survive this, just like he survives every nonissue you people try to throw at him. Christ.
Write about health care.
Write about Iraq.
Write about social security.
Write about home foreclosures.
Write about safeguarding women’s rights.
Write about stopping our government’s use of torture.
Write about the ongoing degradation of our environment.
Write about gay rights.
Write about global warming.
Write about the erosion of the separation between church and state.
Write about the persistent outsourcing of American jobs.
For God’s sake, write about anything that’s really going to matter to anyone. Ranting about William Ayers isn’t going to get anybody their job back. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Ahh, but when you ask a JackAss to help organize and fund your political campaign, you are getting in bed with a JackAss.
When you join forces with a JackAss to send money to an anti-Israeli group one could reasonably conclude that you are in fact also a jack ass.
Oh, heavens. I assume you mean the one instance in which Obama spoke at a fundraiser for a community center in a Palestinian refugee camp. That means he’s practically a suicide bomber, I assume.
Again: this petty and foolish line of argument does nothing to help with getting someone’s job back. You’re wasting our time here. At least Paul Krugman arguably gives a shit about something other than Hillary winning; I’m not convinced you do.
good post Larry I wish you would get some of these tv stations to book you to tell of our concerns about this man whom they want to annoint president … WHO IS THIS GUY … too many questions about his past unanswered for this veteran and one who loves her country …
The only candidate I see out there is HILLARY
Typical Obama tactics you do the dirty tricks then blame other side..Glad President Clinton is finally speaking up and telling like it was in SC not this diatribe of Bullsh-t that we are hearing on MSM…What a disaster of a news media pretty poor assessment when one has to turn to FOX for the most fair coverage of the candidates even though they don’t give Hillary a break they are at least calling the nations attention that Mr. Obama has problems..
Hope to see you on every network soon Larry they, sure wanted you when it was to their advantage now you aren’t relevant to their outcome..Please try for us Larry and see if they might book you..
a concerned vet … We cannot allow this man to become our candidate as he will be ate up by the republican smear machine only this time they won’t be smears just the truth…
Keep it going Larry you and TM are some of the few hopes we can still get thru the news maze…
Write about health care.
Obama’s plan is NOT universal. Hillary’s is.
Write about Iraq.
Obama says he will get us out of Iraq, while his advisors tell people behind the scenes, “Don’t worry. He’s just saying that to get elected.”
Write about social security.
Obama has refused to say that he won’t privatize SS. In fact, he says, “everything is on the table.”
Write about home foreclosures.
Obama’s plan to help homeowners only addresses banks. Hillary’s plan will help prevent foreclosures and keep people in their homes who are currently in foreclosure.
Write about safeguarding women’s rights.
Obama doesn’t say much about women’s rights –other than that abortion ia ALWAYS morally wrong but that he “trusts women to make a prayerful decision.” This condescending, paternalistic, faith-based approach gives me no confidence that he will protect the right to choose. Not to mention that Obama’s entire campaign has been predicated on sexism against the Clinton campaign.
Write about stopping our government’s use of torture.
Not much from Obama on this. Where was the speech on the Senate floor condemning Bush? Where?
Write about the ongoing degradation of our environment.
Obama wants to be considered an environmentalist for passing a law that allowed the nuclear industry to self-regulate how much waste they put in drinking water. Sounds like Bush all over again.
Write about gay rights.
Obama has refused to meet with the editors of gay publications. Obama has several rabidly anti-gay pastors working for his campaign. Obama didn’t want to be photographed with Gavin Newsome, mayor of SF, after Newsome started performing gay marriages. Obama is no friend of the GLBT community.
Write about global warming.
You mean after Obama voted YES on Cheney’s energy bill?
Write about the erosion of the separation between church and state.
Like that faith-based reasoning of Obama’s for why he allows women to have aborions for the time being? Or all those gay-hating pastors who support him?
Write about the persistent outsourcing of American jobs.
You mean like how Obama’s economic advisor assured Canada that bama would do nothing to change NAFTA? Why should we trust him when he speaks about outsourcing?
So - perhaps Obama is pro-terrorism, but in favor of middle-of-the road Democratic policies? That’s why Bill Ayers loves him so?
In all seriousness, your arguments on these issues are at least somewhat worth having. I don’t think Obama’s got the answers on many of these questions, but I think that Hillary is an equally weak candidate on many of these issues (SEE: bankruptcy bill, AUMF, Defense of Marriage Act, conflicted NAFTA history.)
But let’s not get caught up in this gotcha bullshit. I think the manufactured Tuzla controversy is just as bad as this, by the way; no one benefits by it, and the Democratic party loses big time.
It’s about electability, and you know it. And of course, GOTCHA poltiics is the cry of the unprepared amateur who doesn’t have an answer. All Obama has been doing against Clinton is GOTCHA politics, personal attacks, outrageous charges of racism, classic sexist ploys, etc. He is running a repeat of George W. Bush’s campaign. He can’t play ugly and then try to change the rules when the ugly comes back– and this ugly is all of his own making. His whole campaign has succeeded on the fact that he has the media. It’s fascism pure and simple. He’s completely unqualified to be president.
I don’t really think Obama “has” the media - as is evidenced by the ABC debate and the last 4 weeks of nonstop Wright coverage - but I think that Obama is leading in both the Democratic primary and General election polls, has a virtually insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, and he and Hillary have provoked an unprecedented surge in Democratic primary participation.
Of course Obama has the media. He’s had it since Decemeber. You name one debate where one station asked Obama tough questions–questions that he really should have answers for if his campaign is worth the salt–and you people yell “FOUL!” What babies.
General election polls are meaningless right now because the General Election hasn’t started. So let’s dismiss that point entirely.
Obama’s leads were gained through the five months when he was the media sweetheart and nobody dared report on anything that might make him look less than messianic. You know this.
Yes, let the voters keep voting. And remember– neither candidate can break the barrier to nomination numbers without the superdelegates. And there is no rule that says the superdelegates have to vote with the guy who has a 100 delegate lead. Oh, and if you really believe in democracy– then the MI and FL delgations should be seated.
And don’t talk to me about punitive undemocratic DNC rules. Disenfranchising MI and FL is the death knell for the Democrats in Nov. Only a fascist like Obam would agre to disenfranchise 2 million Democratic voters to save his own unbridled ambitions.
The avaialable evidence suggests that 300 superdelegates have not declared. If, as the media and the Obama camp insist, it is so obvious that the guy with the delegate lead should get their backing, and if Hillary can’t beat Obama in the delegate lead– then why haven’t they thrown their support to Obama already and ended it? This is the question the media refuses to ask. This is why Pelosi and Dean are panicking and demanding the SDs declare. But they haven’t. There are 300 superdelegates who know Obama is uneleectable and they are waiting for the PR-appropriate moment to declare for Hillary.
There are 300 superdelegates who know Obama is uneleectable and they are waiting for the PR-appropriate moment to declare for Hillary.
If this thought provides you with some comfort in the current dire situation for your candidate of choice, I have no desire to disillusion you from it.
Polls are not democracy. Voting and counting the votes is Democracy; that means FL and MI. Hardly non stop Wright - only Fox and even there, they do Clinton bashing as well. Polls consistently state that people believe that Obama gets much more favorable coverage and some news people such as Crawford talk about the unfairness. It is quite obvious to all except the Obama followers that Obama is the “Media Darling”. However, that won’t last if Obama is the nominee, then the Media will go to their true Darling - McCain; it is very apparent that Obama cannot handle a hostile press - note the last debate, his “I answered eight questions” presser, his “waffle comments” and just how he stutters and uses ers, ahs and ums. None of what he has faced is anything like he will get if he is the nominee and he has already failed to put bed any of the controversies swirling around him and his campaign.
Obama was creamed in PA and he lost ground in his core groups except the AAs, while Clinton consolidated her base and expanded her dominance in rural and suburban areas and cut her losses in cities. Pittsburgh is a case in point - she won there and she did better in Philadelphia because she gained in the white vote. Obama has 90% of the black vote but is losing ground with every other demographic. Clinton also cut into the youth vote and does well with the older Millenials. She won the people earning between $100,000 and $150,000 and those with advanced degrees. So, she is also starting to cut into his “Creative Class” base. This should be huge warning signals to the SDs about Obama’s electability.
McCain’s campaign took notice and mentioned these trends and are now targeting these Democrats. Take in the polls that show Hillary voters in significant numbers saying they will vote for McCain (many more than Obama voters), plus quite disturbing polls for MA and CA, then we are indeed looking at a landslide for the GE if Obama is the nominee. And none of this is because of the Primary and the so-called negativity of the Clinton campaign - it is all the shortcomings of Obama and his campaign.
“In all seriousness, your arguments on these issues are at least somewhat worth having.”
Typical condescending, elitist tone of the Obama campaign. You don’t get to decide which arguments are “worth having” and which aren’t. Voters decide for themselves what they feel is important. If you want people to pay attention to your perspective, you need to give valid reasons. You need to engage. You can’t demand to be the Decider but then run away from debates about whether or not you are trustworthy. It’s just not how Democracy works–or should work. But after eight years of W Bush, Obama and his camp seem to be taking the fascist cue straight from the neocons– with just a little baby spin toward progressivism– but not enough to actually make any of the corporate media whores worried that their corporate masters– like war-profiteer GE and its MSNBC Goebbels’ (Olberman, Tweety)– have anything to worry about from Messiah Obama. It’s all a sham.
Then again, the post that originated this is a perfect example of that principle.
As far as valid reasons to pay attention to other issues besides Bill Ayers, how ’bout this: people are dying in Iraq and losing jobs here. Let’s engage that “perspective” instead of these petty questions.
How does continuing the conversation about Ayers make the country ANY better at all?
Oh, and Godwin’s law (the use of the word “law” is horribly narcisstic) implies that my use of the term fascist is “merely inflammatory.” I am for real. I am not “merely” being “inflammatory.” Everything that the Obama campaign and his supporters have done is right out of the hate-propaganda, false-saviour playbook. It is fascism. Nothing infammatory. Just the reality.
Yes he is. And if you actually understood what was happening in this election–instead of being buried in your elitist world where you don’t really need a president– you would agree. The effects of what Olberman is doing are far-reaching and astounding. But you don’t get it. I’m not surprised.
See, now I think absolutely none of the cable-news blowhards are actually important enough to do anything “far-reaching and astounding” (except Jon Stewart, who doesn’t really count.) Have you seen KO’s ratings?
OMG, you want to use ratings as a moral, intellectual argument? You are a fool.
(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by JKFriz
| 2008-04-25 16:12:51
I wasn’t making a “moral, intellectual argument.” I stick to the arguments that involve facts. It appears we have a philosophical difference here.
Comment by zozosmom
| 2008-04-25 17:01:41
You still don’t explain why Olberman’s ratings should matter. Are you implying that he speaks the truth because he is popular? Now, that’s just effed up. That’s fascism.
Comment by JKFriz
| 2008-04-25 20:01:28
No, quite the opposite. I’m arguing that in the long run, no one really pays attention to these guys (and they are almost all guys.) You don’t read very closely, do you?
Because no one knows Obama. People have no real idea who Obama is and just like GW Bush, his campaign has always wanted it that way. Unfortunately for him, he doesn’t quite have the media in his pocket like Bush did. So, some issues such as Ayers are reported on but not like they should be. All of these are part of the vetting process. If there truly is no problem, Obama should be able to put this to bed, but he seems to make things worse every time he tries to “explain”.
A simple question like the flag pin (which on its own is definitely a non issue), he can’t answer. Instead, it is still out there in people’s minds and connections with the Ayers, Wright, Rezko, etal are being made and questions about his patriotism are gelling in voters’ minds. This is exactly the meme that Democrats can ill afford to have their Presidential Nominee convey and have the Repubs once again paint the Dems as weak and ineffectual on national security.
This is also a judgment issue; which is Obama’s whole campaign on the Iraq war. So, personal and professional associations are part of that process and in defining yourself. Obama has failed to define himself (I think purposely because he wanted to be that empty vessel and have voters project their hopes on him). However, he has too many shady characters in his background to pull that off and I believe that it is fair game to bring these to light. Voters want to know what influence these associations have on Obama. Obama also needs to be able to have satisfactory answers to these questions; since he doesn’t , it is fair to think that there is either some real issues with these associations, or he just can’t communicate and get these out of the way. Neither one of those reasons give me confidence in Obama’s electability and gives me pause about how he will govern and who will be influencing him.
I agree 100%. Obama should be addressing ALL of these issues, but he isn’t.
BTW-have you
Ever noticed that he never calls himself a Democrat?
Ever noticed that he always focuses on Republicans and Independents?
Ever noticed that he never addresses AA issues?
Ever noticed that he takes for granted older, latino, women, AA, poor and middle class voters?
You can’t face the reality that BO will not win those states.
I am an independent for many years now. The tolerance level for bull is low out in indie country. The tolerance for unqualified bull is non-existant. BO is not qualified.
Obama and the DNC is dreaming, if they think independents will vote for a unqualified fraud that BO.
This is inane - one quote with no context and this shows that he considers himself a Democrat? Most of the time Obama is castigating Democrats and the left wing in particular (don’t ask me why they support him, may be because of self hate). He tries to paint the picture that both parties got us into the mess we are in and that bipartisanship is the be all and end all. He attacks universal health care that both Clinton and Edwards plans have using right wing attacks and he extols Reagan and Bush I while denigrating the only two term Democratic President and his Presidency since Truman. All of these are just some examples of how he doesn’t ascribe to being a Democrat. In my eyes, without all the other issues including the race baiting and sexism that he and his campaign engage in, this makes me not support Obama. But there are so many other reasons and plus, Clinton has proven that she is a true Democrat who will fight for Democratic principles. No contest as to who is the superior choice. Many other reasons that Clinton is better and Obama fails the “smell test”.
It is about judgement. Obama’s sucks. Everyone of his BBFs is anti-american.
I and millions of others only want the best for this country and he ain’t it.
We need someone with solutions not speechs. Someone who will reach both sides to try and fix problems. Not someone who will vote present or sleep thru the vote or be too busy campaigning to hold committee hearings.
This country deserved a lot better than Obama.
Write about stopping our government’s use of torture.
Write about the ongoing degradation of our environment.
Write about gay rights.
Write about global warming.
Write about the erosion of the separation between church and state.
Write about the persistent outsourcing of American jobs.
HEY!!! maybe u should listen to Hillary in a debate instead of moaning Obama’s name…or just google those topics. You will find LOADS of pro-hillary supports writing about them. Heck yu can plenty right on this blog!
Last week? Do you have attention deficit disorder ? There has been a campaign for over 18 months: get over your lazy attitude and look the hundreds of posts on precisely these topics that there are in the archives.
I’m not entirely unsympathetic to the Weathermen’s stated cause, but hold on a moment–Ayers bombed the Pentagon, the FBI, robbed banks, organized riots, hijacked a student peace movement and formed a terrorist cell from it.
That’s not merely wrong. It’s politically suspicious. It’s terrorism–even if it was done in the name a of a good cause.
Agree and they ruined the anti-war and progressive movement that was started with Dr. King. Larry is right to question if Obama and his “friends” are bent on this type of “change”.
I wish you well with that endeavor. They are here constantly baiting and arguing on form over substance. It’s like watching my niece test her mother. You would think that she was inventing envelopes.
I suppose we all thought the same thing at one point in the Viet Nam war. We marched. We participated in peaceful protest. My college was in DC, so we usually had people sleeping on our floor in the dorm. But when people started blowing things up, I drew the line. Isn’t that what we were protesting against?
So if I’m not radical enough for Bill Ayers or Barack Obama, I can live with that. I think most Americans can.
I appreciate that you’re defending substantial conversations on here. I’ve noticed your many posts about American foreign policy, health care, and the declining American dollar.
With regard to Ayers, you have to do a lot of reading about his history before you understand how really bad he is. He and his Neo-Liberal coterie are the worst sort of academic leftists. These people have disproportionate influence on the Democratic party. And these are the people who keep losing us elections.
I can’t believe the DNC is forcing this guy down our throat to run against a damn war hero. Do they have some deal worked out with the GOP? I honestly can’t figure this out.
Yes, when General Electric–owner of MSNBC and war-profiteer extraordinaire– is propping up Obama (via Olberman, Maddow and Tweety), one has to wonder who is pulling the strings of the Democratic Party.
The Obama supporters remind me of a yuppie parent whose kid keeps getting into trouble.
“He’s really a good boy. He just got in with a bad crowd. He would never ever steal a car. He has hypoclycemia and ADD. He broke into his grandmothers house, but he didn’t hurt anybody. He’s not like the rest of those kids you usually deal with. ”
how long it is going to take for the DNC to admit that Obama is the poison pill for Democrat in the general election?
Besides the 3 amigos: Wright, Rezko, Ayers, Obama managed to piss off almost every demographic group, women, hicks, GLBT, garlic nose, small town, blue collar. FL is a grave yard. And Axelrod just came out and insulted the latest group, old people.
The one thing I really don’t like about Hillary Clinton is her Israel Über Alles position, but this position is held by almost all Congresspersons. Barack Obama made some mild pro-Palestinian remark and regretted it. He won’t do that again. But Wright, Ayers, et alia are passionate and outspoken about the Palestinian plight, and I imagine Ayers, Barack, and Michelle have had many bull sessions about the harm Israel does. Is this part of Obama’s not-to-be-spoken-about-before-the-election agenda?
“I think it is very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States … I think that the people should understand that I will be Hamas’ worst nightmare,”
John McCain.
You don’t get it. Hamas, a terrorist organization, has endorsed Obama and Axelrod, instead of repudiating this, stated they were flattered by the JFK comparison (what a stupid, stupid comment). Israel, who most Americans support, has snubbed Carter, because he met with Hamas. It is actually a good thing for Obama that Carter hasn’t officially endorsed him. Add Farrakhan, Wright, his Church’s support of Hamas, Kahlidi, Brzezinski, another top adviser who is very critical of Israel and pro-Palestinian, and the Repubs will have a field day defining Obama has weak on terror, anti-Israel, effete and out of touch. In fact, the 527’s will go even further, and perhaps even suggest he is not patriotic (and worse). This is a nightmare for the Democratic Party.
“I think it is very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States … I think that the people should understand that I will be Hamas’ worst nightmare,”
John McCain.
McCain will destroy Obama”
It’s oh so illuminating that your knee-jerk reaction is to slam Obama with these remarks, rather than condemn the remarks themselves.
You mean like Axelrod did about the Hamas endorsement? Get real, I have serious reservations about Obama on this question, mainly in that I think that he will worsen the situation and making Israel more intractable and giving weight to antisemitism in the region. Plus, forget the Jewish vote - they aren’t about to go for Obama after this. I can’t condemn McCain’s remark because they are true and Axelrod nor Obama have come out with denouncing this endorsement in any believable manner. So, how in the world can we, if even we were predisposed to do so, condemn these remarks?
If the nominee, Obama will be The Tomato Can From Heaven for the GOP machine.
As a cynical exercise, the Repukes might even put a GOP idiot of the female variety on the ticket as VP…Julie Nixon comes to mind…just to rub our noses in it.
It appears to me Obama’s relationship with Ayers (and all the other people he would love did not exist at this time) was fashionable at the time he had the relationship. Those were the crowds he was comfortable with. Sad for Obama now that the heart and soul of America is moderate and not into extreme politics, past present and future. I can’t see how Obama can be elected in the GE no matter how the Obamabots and MSM spin him.
http://www.hillaryis44.org/
JOIN
AND HAVE FUN BLOGGING
I guess No Quarter is a little too tame for Sonia.
Good post Larry….Threre is no exscuse for racial suprematism or marxism.
The thing that comes to mind about Ayers, and Obama’s association with him, is that for every once crime or plot we know about with Ayers and the Underground, there are probably 5 more that we don’t.
You just don’t associate with bad people if you’re not a bad person yourself. Unrepenting radicals are hardly indicative of unity, hope, or change.
Brand Obama is a creation. And if they succeed in shoving him down our throats, and he somehow manages to beat McCain (never going to happen) then we’ll be watching a film in the future called “Obama’s Brain”, about David Axelrod. the King Maker. Just blows me away that people are suspending all rational thinking so that they cannot even acknowledge that the “inspiration” they’re feeling has been written by a middle-aged white guy that specializes in messages for AA candidates. And.. that much of what Obama preaches is rehashed from other candidates or clients of Axelrods.
Actions speak louder than words… and you ARE judged by the company you keep. How hard is that to grasp?
Larry and Susan,
Ayers was a Grad Student getting his second masters as well as Doctrate in Eduaction at Columbia, the same time Obama tranferred in. It is almost certain that Obama had him as a “teacher” - known in academia lingo as a Graduate Assistant - for one or more of his undergrad classes.
Hopefully by Sunday, I can connect enough dots to show that Bernadine Dohrn, whom Mel tells us got Obama his internship at Sidly et al law firm, also knew Obama in New York - though she is smarter than Ayers and leaves fewer “footprints”.
So it’s not that Obama and Ayers just “sat on the same board” -as you suspected the relationship is much deeper than that.
These SOB’s truly are trying to “Re-Create ‘68″ in more ways than one.
Look who owned the apartment building that Obama lived in while in New York…
The landlord in the early 1980s was Jay Weiss, a real estate mogul who was then the husband of the actress Kathleen Turner.
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/where-obama-lived-in-1980s-new-york/
Nellie, Interesting info connecting Ayers and Obama at Columbia. I really want to see a piece that fills in the real history of their relationship. Lots of stuff has been posted here. I hope someone is working on putting it all together. And soon.
The man who was Obam’s mentor in Hawaii and good friends with Ayers Sr.
must have been telling BO to look Ayers son up.
I believe Nellie is correct that the reason the his Columbia U days are dodgy is because he was hanging out on a regular basis with these terrorists while in NY.
The landlord in the early 1980s was Jay Weiss, a real estate mogul who was then the husband of the actress Kathleen Turner.
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/where-obama-lived-in-1980s-new-york/
“You just don’t associate with bad people if you’re not a bad person yourself.”
That’s a nice shortcut around thinking.
Ayers is undoubtedly a jackass, but serving on the same board as a jackass does not a jackass make. Try again. folks.
Obama will survive this, just like he survives every nonissue you people try to throw at him. Christ.
Write about health care.
Write about Iraq.
Write about social security.
Write about home foreclosures.
Write about safeguarding women’s rights.
Write about stopping our government’s use of torture.
Write about the ongoing degradation of our environment.
Write about gay rights.
Write about global warming.
Write about the erosion of the separation between church and state.
Write about the persistent outsourcing of American jobs.
For God’s sake, write about anything that’s really going to matter to anyone. Ranting about William Ayers isn’t going to get anybody their job back. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Ahh, but when you ask a JackAss to help organize and fund your political campaign, you are getting in bed with a JackAss.
When you join forces with a JackAss to send money to an anti-Israeli group one could reasonably conclude that you are in fact also a jack ass.
Oh, heavens. I assume you mean the one instance in which Obama spoke at a fundraiser for a community center in a Palestinian refugee camp. That means he’s practically a suicide bomber, I assume.
Again: this petty and foolish line of argument does nothing to help with getting someone’s job back. You’re wasting our time here. At least Paul Krugman arguably gives a shit about something other than Hillary winning; I’m not convinced you do.
LOL
good post Larry I wish you would get some of these tv stations to book you to tell of our concerns about this man whom they want to annoint president … WHO IS THIS GUY … too many questions about his past unanswered for this veteran and one who loves her country …
The only candidate I see out there is HILLARY
Typical Obama tactics you do the dirty tricks then blame other side..Glad President Clinton is finally speaking up and telling like it was in SC not this diatribe of Bullsh-t that we are hearing on MSM…What a disaster of a news media pretty poor assessment when one has to turn to FOX for the most fair coverage of the candidates even though they don’t give Hillary a break they are at least calling the nations attention that Mr. Obama has problems..
Hope to see you on every network soon Larry they, sure wanted you when it was to their advantage now you aren’t relevant to their outcome..Please try for us Larry and see if they might book you..
a concerned vet … We cannot allow this man to become our candidate as he will be ate up by the republican smear machine only this time they won’t be smears just the truth…
Keep it going Larry you and TM are some of the few hopes we can still get thru the news maze…
Write about health care.
Obama’s plan is NOT universal. Hillary’s is.
Write about Iraq.
Obama says he will get us out of Iraq, while his advisors tell people behind the scenes, “Don’t worry. He’s just saying that to get elected.”
Write about social security.
Obama has refused to say that he won’t privatize SS. In fact, he says, “everything is on the table.”
Write about home foreclosures.
Obama’s plan to help homeowners only addresses banks. Hillary’s plan will help prevent foreclosures and keep people in their homes who are currently in foreclosure.
Write about safeguarding women’s rights.
Obama doesn’t say much about women’s rights –other than that abortion ia ALWAYS morally wrong but that he “trusts women to make a prayerful decision.” This condescending, paternalistic, faith-based approach gives me no confidence that he will protect the right to choose. Not to mention that Obama’s entire campaign has been predicated on sexism against the Clinton campaign.
Write about stopping our government’s use of torture.
Not much from Obama on this. Where was the speech on the Senate floor condemning Bush? Where?
Write about the ongoing degradation of our environment.
Obama wants to be considered an environmentalist for passing a law that allowed the nuclear industry to self-regulate how much waste they put in drinking water. Sounds like Bush all over again.
Write about gay rights.
Obama has refused to meet with the editors of gay publications. Obama has several rabidly anti-gay pastors working for his campaign. Obama didn’t want to be photographed with Gavin Newsome, mayor of SF, after Newsome started performing gay marriages. Obama is no friend of the GLBT community.
Write about global warming.
You mean after Obama voted YES on Cheney’s energy bill?
Write about the erosion of the separation between church and state.
Like that faith-based reasoning of Obama’s for why he allows women to have aborions for the time being? Or all those gay-hating pastors who support him?
Write about the persistent outsourcing of American jobs.
You mean like how Obama’s economic advisor assured Canada that bama would do nothing to change NAFTA? Why should we trust him when he speaks about outsourcing?
So - perhaps Obama is pro-terrorism, but in favor of middle-of-the road Democratic policies? That’s why Bill Ayers loves him so?
In all seriousness, your arguments on these issues are at least somewhat worth having. I don’t think Obama’s got the answers on many of these questions, but I think that Hillary is an equally weak candidate on many of these issues (SEE: bankruptcy bill, AUMF, Defense of Marriage Act, conflicted NAFTA history.)
But let’s not get caught up in this gotcha bullshit. I think the manufactured Tuzla controversy is just as bad as this, by the way; no one benefits by it, and the Democratic party loses big time.
It’s about electability, and you know it. And of course, GOTCHA poltiics is the cry of the unprepared amateur who doesn’t have an answer. All Obama has been doing against Clinton is GOTCHA politics, personal attacks, outrageous charges of racism, classic sexist ploys, etc. He is running a repeat of George W. Bush’s campaign. He can’t play ugly and then try to change the rules when the ugly comes back– and this ugly is all of his own making. His whole campaign has succeeded on the fact that he has the media. It’s fascism pure and simple. He’s completely unqualified to be president.
“It’s fascism pure and simple.”
I don’t really think Obama “has” the media - as is evidenced by the ABC debate and the last 4 weeks of nonstop Wright coverage - but I think that Obama is leading in both the Democratic primary and General election polls, has a virtually insurmountable lead in pledged delegates, and he and Hillary have provoked an unprecedented surge in Democratic primary participation.
And that’s democracy, pure and simple.
Of course Obama has the media. He’s had it since Decemeber. You name one debate where one station asked Obama tough questions–questions that he really should have answers for if his campaign is worth the salt–and you people yell “FOUL!” What babies.
General election polls are meaningless right now because the General Election hasn’t started. So let’s dismiss that point entirely.
Obama’s leads were gained through the five months when he was the media sweetheart and nobody dared report on anything that might make him look less than messianic. You know this.
Yes, let the voters keep voting. And remember– neither candidate can break the barrier to nomination numbers without the superdelegates. And there is no rule that says the superdelegates have to vote with the guy who has a 100 delegate lead. Oh, and if you really believe in democracy– then the MI and FL delgations should be seated.
And don’t talk to me about punitive undemocratic DNC rules. Disenfranchising MI and FL is the death knell for the Democrats in Nov. Only a fascist like Obam would agre to disenfranchise 2 million Democratic voters to save his own unbridled ambitions.
And all the superdelegates know it.
“And all the superdelegates know it.”
I would argue that the available evidence tends to contradict this assertion ;).
The avaialable evidence suggests that 300 superdelegates have not declared. If, as the media and the Obama camp insist, it is so obvious that the guy with the delegate lead should get their backing, and if Hillary can’t beat Obama in the delegate lead– then why haven’t they thrown their support to Obama already and ended it? This is the question the media refuses to ask. This is why Pelosi and Dean are panicking and demanding the SDs declare. But they haven’t. There are 300 superdelegates who know Obama is uneleectable and they are waiting for the PR-appropriate moment to declare for Hillary.
If this thought provides you with some comfort in the current dire situation for your candidate of choice, I have no desire to disillusion you from it.
Then present what “available evidence” you have.
zozosmom makes very clear and factual statements and thats all you can say?
A wink?
Polls are not democracy. Voting and counting the votes is Democracy; that means FL and MI. Hardly non stop Wright - only Fox and even there, they do Clinton bashing as well. Polls consistently state that people believe that Obama gets much more favorable coverage and some news people such as Crawford talk about the unfairness. It is quite obvious to all except the Obama followers that Obama is the “Media Darling”. However, that won’t last if Obama is the nominee, then the Media will go to their true Darling - McCain; it is very apparent that Obama cannot handle a hostile press - note the last debate, his “I answered eight questions” presser, his “waffle comments” and just how he stutters and uses ers, ahs and ums. None of what he has faced is anything like he will get if he is the nominee and he has already failed to put bed any of the controversies swirling around him and his campaign.
Obama was creamed in PA and he lost ground in his core groups except the AAs, while Clinton consolidated her base and expanded her dominance in rural and suburban areas and cut her losses in cities. Pittsburgh is a case in point - she won there and she did better in Philadelphia because she gained in the white vote. Obama has 90% of the black vote but is losing ground with every other demographic. Clinton also cut into the youth vote and does well with the older Millenials. She won the people earning between $100,000 and $150,000 and those with advanced degrees. So, she is also starting to cut into his “Creative Class” base. This should be huge warning signals to the SDs about Obama’s electability.
McCain’s campaign took notice and mentioned these trends and are now targeting these Democrats. Take in the polls that show Hillary voters in significant numbers saying they will vote for McCain (many more than Obama voters), plus quite disturbing polls for MA and CA, then we are indeed looking at a landslide for the GE if Obama is the nominee. And none of this is because of the Primary and the so-called negativity of the Clinton campaign - it is all the shortcomings of Obama and his campaign.
“In all seriousness, your arguments on these issues are at least somewhat worth having.”
Typical condescending, elitist tone of the Obama campaign. You don’t get to decide which arguments are “worth having” and which aren’t. Voters decide for themselves what they feel is important. If you want people to pay attention to your perspective, you need to give valid reasons. You need to engage. You can’t demand to be the Decider but then run away from debates about whether or not you are trustworthy. It’s just not how Democracy works–or should work. But after eight years of W Bush, Obama and his camp seem to be taking the fascist cue straight from the neocons– with just a little baby spin toward progressivism– but not enough to actually make any of the corporate media whores worried that their corporate masters– like war-profiteer GE and its MSNBC Goebbels’ (Olberman, Tweety)– have anything to worry about from Messiah Obama. It’s all a sham.
I’d like to quickly refer you to Godwin’s Law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law
Then again, the post that originated this is a perfect example of that principle.
As far as valid reasons to pay attention to other issues besides Bill Ayers, how ’bout this: people are dying in Iraq and losing jobs here. Let’s engage that “perspective” instead of these petty questions.
How does continuing the conversation about Ayers make the country ANY better at all?
How does continuing to imply, suggest, call Bill and Hillary racist help the country?
How does heeping personal attack upon personal attack on Hillary (with sexist overtones) help the country?
Look pal, you have no intellectually honest leg to stand on. All you have is spin and rhetoric and an ego.
Answering a question with an unrelated question actually implies that you don’t have an intellectual leg to stand on.
It’s called analogy, dude. It’s called Socratic. It’s called debate.
I’ve clearly overstepped your intellectual capacity.
Oh, and Godwin’s law (the use of the word “law” is horribly narcisstic) implies that my use of the term fascist is “merely inflammatory.” I am for real. I am not “merely” being “inflammatory.” Everything that the Obama campaign and his supporters have done is right out of the hate-propaganda, false-saviour playbook. It is fascism. Nothing infammatory. Just the reality.
Actually I was referring to
So Keith Olbermann is equal to Josef Goebbels? Eminently reasonable.
Yes he is. And if you actually understood what was happening in this election–instead of being buried in your elitist world where you don’t really need a president– you would agree. The effects of what Olberman is doing are far-reaching and astounding. But you don’t get it. I’m not surprised.
See, now I think absolutely none of the cable-news blowhards are actually important enough to do anything “far-reaching and astounding” (except Jon Stewart, who doesn’t really count.) Have you seen KO’s ratings?
But feel free to disagree. I’m sure you will.
OMG, you want to use ratings as a moral, intellectual argument? You are a fool.
I wasn’t making a “moral, intellectual argument.” I stick to the arguments that involve facts. It appears we have a philosophical difference here.
You still don’t explain why Olberman’s ratings should matter. Are you implying that he speaks the truth because he is popular? Now, that’s just effed up. That’s fascism.
No, quite the opposite. I’m arguing that in the long run, no one really pays attention to these guys (and they are almost all guys.) You don’t read very closely, do you?
JK Fritz: those must be the “facts” of your alternative reality, right? Come down to earth buddy; can’t live in the ether forever.
Because no one knows Obama. People have no real idea who Obama is and just like GW Bush, his campaign has always wanted it that way. Unfortunately for him, he doesn’t quite have the media in his pocket like Bush did. So, some issues such as Ayers are reported on but not like they should be. All of these are part of the vetting process. If there truly is no problem, Obama should be able to put this to bed, but he seems to make things worse every time he tries to “explain”.
A simple question like the flag pin (which on its own is definitely a non issue), he can’t answer. Instead, it is still out there in people’s minds and connections with the Ayers, Wright, Rezko, etal are being made and questions about his patriotism are gelling in voters’ minds. This is exactly the meme that Democrats can ill afford to have their Presidential Nominee convey and have the Repubs once again paint the Dems as weak and ineffectual on national security.
This is also a judgment issue; which is Obama’s whole campaign on the Iraq war. So, personal and professional associations are part of that process and in defining yourself. Obama has failed to define himself (I think purposely because he wanted to be that empty vessel and have voters project their hopes on him). However, he has too many shady characters in his background to pull that off and I believe that it is fair game to bring these to light. Voters want to know what influence these associations have on Obama. Obama also needs to be able to have satisfactory answers to these questions; since he doesn’t , it is fair to think that there is either some real issues with these associations, or he just can’t communicate and get these out of the way. Neither one of those reasons give me confidence in Obama’s electability and gives me pause about how he will govern and who will be influencing him.
I agree 100%. Obama should be addressing ALL of these issues, but he isn’t.
BTW-have you
Ever noticed that he never calls himself a Democrat?
Ever noticed that he always focuses on Republicans and Independents?
Ever noticed that he never addresses AA issues?
Ever noticed that he takes for granted older, latino, women, AA, poor and middle class voters?
Not true on all counts.
“I am a Democrat because we are the party that believes we’re all in this together” - Barack Obama
Ever noticed that he never addresses AA issues
Now that you mention it, he is afraid of AA and hates whites and especially white women.
“I am a Democrat because we are the party that believes we’re all in this together” - Barack Obama
His actions and people he associates with prove otherwise.
I presume this is why he had blowout wins in notoriously diverse states like Wyoming and Minnesota.
Presume all you like. Wyoming? Minnesota?
You can’t face the reality that BO will not win those states.
I am an independent for many years now. The tolerance level for bull is low out in indie country. The tolerance for unqualified bull is non-existant. BO is not qualified.
Obama and the DNC is dreaming, if they think independents will vote for a unqualified fraud that BO.
This is inane - one quote with no context and this shows that he considers himself a Democrat? Most of the time Obama is castigating Democrats and the left wing in particular (don’t ask me why they support him, may be because of self hate). He tries to paint the picture that both parties got us into the mess we are in and that bipartisanship is the be all and end all. He attacks universal health care that both Clinton and Edwards plans have using right wing attacks and he extols Reagan and Bush I while denigrating the only two term Democratic President and his Presidency since Truman. All of these are just some examples of how he doesn’t ascribe to being a Democrat. In my eyes, without all the other issues including the race baiting and sexism that he and his campaign engage in, this makes me not support Obama. But there are so many other reasons and plus, Clinton has proven that she is a true Democrat who will fight for Democratic principles. No contest as to who is the superior choice. Many other reasons that Clinton is better and Obama fails the “smell test”.
It is about judgement. Obama’s sucks. Everyone of his BBFs is anti-american.
I and millions of others only want the best for this country and he ain’t it.
We need someone with solutions not speechs. Someone who will reach both sides to try and fix problems. Not someone who will vote present or sleep thru the vote or be too busy campaigning to hold committee hearings.
This country deserved a lot better than Obama.
Write about health care.
Write about Iraq.
Write about social security.
Write about home foreclosures.
Write about safeguarding women’s rights.
Write about stopping our government’s use of torture.
Write about the ongoing degradation of our environment.
Write about gay rights.
Write about global warming.
Write about the erosion of the separation between church and state.
Write about the persistent outsourcing of American jobs.
HEY!!! maybe u should listen to Hillary in a debate instead of moaning Obama’s name…or just google those topics. You will find LOADS of pro-hillary supports writing about them. Heck yu can plenty right on this blog!
Nice try. Tell me what percentage of the past week’s posts have addressed any of this.
JKFriz:
Last week? Do you have attention deficit disorder ? There has been a campaign for over 18 months: get over your lazy attitude and look the hundreds of posts on precisely these topics that there are in the archives.
Haven’t you figured out that LJ and his Clintonista insurgents have no shame?…
I know they like to sling the poop at everything Obama and anything anti Billary, but they seriously have no shame these days.
And I used to think LJ was credible and intelligent……
Egads…
I’m not entirely unsympathetic to the Weathermen’s stated cause, but hold on a moment–Ayers bombed the Pentagon, the FBI, robbed banks, organized riots, hijacked a student peace movement and formed a terrorist cell from it.
That’s not merely wrong. It’s politically suspicious. It’s terrorism–even if it was done in the name a of a good cause.
and if Hundt merely says it was wrong, then he may not really understand the tonnes of bricks that the GOP will bury Obama under.
Hundt is like most of the out of touch elitists who support Obama who suffer from impaired memory syndrome.
They forget what the GOP did to Cleland, Gore and Kerry. And these men had none of the radioactive baggage he does.
The GOP will eviscerate Obama on Ayers, Wright, Hamas and Rezko.
My money is on Obama being cooked and ready to served by September.
Their cause was phony…..It was bull shit….
Agree and they ruined the anti-war and progressive movement that was started with Dr. King. Larry is right to question if Obama and his “friends” are bent on this type of “change”.
Sen. Obama does not understand the past period. Just like his followers, we need to educate his followers before its too late.
He has no understanding of this country history, so tell me how could he have the ability to change a system that he knows nothing about?
What has Sen. Obama done for South Side of Chigaco?
we need to educate his followers
I wish you well with that endeavor. They are here constantly baiting and arguing on form over substance. It’s like watching my niece test her mother. You would think that she was inventing envelopes.
I suppose we all thought the same thing at one point in the Viet Nam war. We marched. We participated in peaceful protest. My college was in DC, so we usually had people sleeping on our floor in the dorm. But when people started blowing things up, I drew the line. Isn’t that what we were protesting against?
So if I’m not radical enough for Bill Ayers or Barack Obama, I can live with that. I think most Americans can.
I appreciate that you’re defending substantial conversations on here. I’ve noticed your many posts about American foreign policy, health care, and the declining American dollar.
Hey, it was, like, forty years ago, man, and it’s not like anybody died or anything.
Oh, wait . . .
With regard to Ayers, you have to do a lot of reading about his history before you understand how really bad he is. He and his Neo-Liberal coterie are the worst sort of academic leftists. These people have disproportionate influence on the Democratic party. And these are the people who keep losing us elections.
I can’t believe the DNC is forcing this guy down our throat to run against a damn war hero. Do they have some deal worked out with the GOP? I honestly can’t figure this out.
Bizarre.
Yes, when General Electric–owner of MSNBC and war-profiteer extraordinaire– is propping up Obama (via Olberman, Maddow and Tweety), one has to wonder who is pulling the strings of the Democratic Party.
This from a commenter on a site that uses FOX News clips almost exclusively…
Another meaningless ad hominem attack. All you people have is spin.
I like your style! ZoZo is a lucky child!
Thanks for the high-five, beebop!
The Obama supporters remind me of a yuppie parent whose kid keeps getting into trouble.
“He’s really a good boy. He just got in with a bad crowd. He would never ever steal a car. He has hypoclycemia and ADD. He broke into his grandmothers house, but he didn’t hurt anybody. He’s not like the rest of those kids you usually deal with. ”
Nothing the little darling does is wrong.
Good post Larry….There is no exscuse for racial suprematism or marxism.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=P0hNnvq_gN8
how long it is going to take for the DNC to admit that Obama is the poison pill for Democrat in the general election?
Besides the 3 amigos: Wright, Rezko, Ayers, Obama managed to piss off almost every demographic group, women, hicks, GLBT, garlic nose, small town, blue collar. FL is a grave yard. And Axelrod just came out and insulted the latest group, old people.
The reliable thing about old people is they forget … and then they die.
Not in time for November of course … just sayin’
The one thing I really don’t like about Hillary Clinton is her Israel Über Alles position, but this position is held by almost all Congresspersons. Barack Obama made some mild pro-Palestinian remark and regretted it. He won’t do that again. But Wright, Ayers, et alia are passionate and outspoken about the Palestinian plight, and I imagine Ayers, Barack, and Michelle have had many bull sessions about the harm Israel does. Is this part of Obama’s not-to-be-spoken-about-before-the-election agenda?
indeed it is. just think about why hamas endorsed him and has a call center in gaza making cold calls for him.
Uppity has a very on target statement … they just intend to change the direction of the guns. I am afraid that that is exactly the case.
Jimmy’s misbegotten adventure did nothing to assuage my concerns …
OT
“I think it is very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States … I think that the people should understand that I will be Hamas’ worst nightmare,”
John McCain.
McCain will destroy Obama
thank heavens someone will save us from this nightmare. clearly the dnc is too stupid.
Certainly. 100 more years in Iraq. Thank heavens. And YOU won’t have to leave the party, lucky you.
You don’t get it. Hamas, a terrorist organization, has endorsed Obama and Axelrod, instead of repudiating this, stated they were flattered by the JFK comparison (what a stupid, stupid comment). Israel, who most Americans support, has snubbed Carter, because he met with Hamas. It is actually a good thing for Obama that Carter hasn’t officially endorsed him. Add Farrakhan, Wright, his Church’s support of Hamas, Kahlidi, Brzezinski, another top adviser who is very critical of Israel and pro-Palestinian, and the Repubs will have a field day defining Obama has weak on terror, anti-Israel, effete and out of touch. In fact, the 527’s will go even further, and perhaps even suggest he is not patriotic (and worse). This is a nightmare for the Democratic Party.
“OT
“I think it is very clear who Hamas wants to be the next president of the United States … I think that the people should understand that I will be Hamas’ worst nightmare,”
John McCain.
McCain will destroy Obama”
It’s oh so illuminating that your knee-jerk reaction is to slam Obama with these remarks, rather than condemn the remarks themselves.
You mean like Axelrod did about the Hamas endorsement? Get real, I have serious reservations about Obama on this question, mainly in that I think that he will worsen the situation and making Israel more intractable and giving weight to antisemitism in the region. Plus, forget the Jewish vote - they aren’t about to go for Obama after this. I can’t condemn McCain’s remark because they are true and Axelrod nor Obama have come out with denouncing this endorsement in any believable manner. So, how in the world can we, if even we were predisposed to do so, condemn these remarks?
If the nominee, Obama will be The Tomato Can From Heaven for the GOP machine.
As a cynical exercise, the Repukes might even put a GOP idiot of the female variety on the ticket as VP…Julie Nixon comes to mind…just to rub our noses in it.
The answer is yes in my opinion.
Count me in on not forgetting!
Obama campaign is a huge excuse machine. Obama is unelectable in the GE no matter how much propaganda they spew.
It appears to me Obama’s relationship with Ayers (and all the other people he would love did not exist at this time) was fashionable at the time he had the relationship. Those were the crowds he was comfortable with. Sad for Obama now that the heart and soul of America is moderate and not into extreme politics, past present and future. I can’t see how Obama can be elected in the GE no matter how the Obamabots and MSM spin him.
Maybe Ayers will have to go on Moyers next? LOL
how can i make my name appear ,,,blue,,